For most roll film photography, I place my shadows, and then I don't care where the highlights fall. (I use TMX, TMY or Acros. This might be different with other films.) I just give normal development. I don't like the loss of tonal separation that minus development gives. If the scene is massively contrasty, then I use various techniques, such as two bath development.....
“You often feel tired, not because you've done too much, but because you've done too little of what sparks a light in you.”
― Alexander Den Heijer, Nothing You Don't Already Know
I never bracket unless it's for initial testing purposes. With roll film I might duplicate a shot if I'm worried about wind shake or something like that. Wasting an extra sheet of 8x10 film, however, can get awfully expensive awfully fast, especially with color film. Bracketing is out of the question. But even bracketing is no substitute for specific exposure and development like the ZS teaches. Sheet film shots can be segregated into different development categories. But with roll film you have to develop for the predominant cases on any given roll, and then figure out how to salvage any odd duck on the same roll if necessary. That's a lot easier to do today with modern VC papers than it once was.
Ansel Adams would expose a second sheet of film at the same exposure, but he would never bracket. As he put it, he'd rather have two correct exposures, versus two incorrect exposures.
Often a second exposure is impossible, especially when working with a view camera. The light can suddenly change, or the position of clouds and shadows, or the wind can act up. And if one is lugging an 8x10 up a steep hill, one simply might not want to carry more than a minimum of film holders.
I don’t think I’ve missed a second exposure is 45 plus years of using a view camera, whether it’s 4x5 or 8x20.
No offense, but what’s a minimum number? It might be zero or it might be ten.
Practice and be prepared.
“You can’t have everything. Where would you put it?”
I think the glut of roll film holders is proof that there is a work around for multiple exposures.. seriously MF cameras are rather quick to advance, just like 35m cameras.Originally Posted by Drew Wiley
But yes you DO make a good point on the relative quick changes in natural lighting that heppen. I get burned by it too, we all do. However i think the scientific - ish aspects can go on a back seat.
Oh, I might double up a shot with MF, but not necessarily to have a spare, and certainly not to bracket. For example, I had a white heron in a critical spot of a shoreline scene a couple days ago, and had to keep track of its movements and shape very carefully, yet at the same time, tried to compose the interaction of intricate waves. That's a semi-wildlife thing where a second shot improves my odds. With a view camera, it would be one shot or none.
When I say that I shoot an extra frame or two "to bracket", it's not necessarily to insure a correct exposure as much as it is to allow me an opportunity to apply a different treatment to the second negative after I've seen the first. I shouldn't have to explain this to ANY of the members here, but... Sometimes you see an opportunity to handle an extra negative differently - maybe expand the development a bit more, or contract it, or maybe switch to a compensating developer, or - as I sometimes do - develop the spare neg for one of the alt printing out processes.
If you're at a point where you can expose ONE sheet of film and go home happy, knowing you've nailed it every single time, then good for you. Not all of us work that way. I prefer to have options available to me AFTER I've packed up the camera. It encourages me to stay flexible in how I approach what I do. You'd think that would be valued on a forum like this, wouldn't you?
I always do what Paul explains, I process the first exposure and then adjust if I need, I do a lot of abstract work , Cross Process, Solarization and its required to have different exposures even after hundreds of times.
Same here! I don't do many expansions/contractions of my film nowadays, but back when I did I preferred something a bit different from your standard ZS expansions (hardly ever did contractions.) For example, I'd develop for N+1 1/2 vs the normal N+1. I always thought that an N+1 was no different than moving up a paper grade, whereas the N+1 1/2 gave me an option between paper grades. Nowadays, with VC papers I don't find nearly as much need to modify film development.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks